Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ashersky]

It's such a dumb claim for scum though. Even if we bought it, town could have a cop who can just check it at night. No way he gets away with it. And what does he get out of it?

A cop can't confirm if he's "weak" or not, just if he's scum or not.  But that's something that is confirmed by a cop with or without a claim.  I don't think your logic applies.

Are day 1 scum fake claims a part of the F.DS meta now? Because when I left day 1 claims in general were kind of not a thing. ITT we've had 3 without anyone even getting near L1.

D1 claims are a thing now, yeah.  Well, in closed setups it is.  In open/semi-open setups, it is less likely, unless there's a good reason for it (like mine in Dynasty Warriors 1, for example).

[nkirbit]

I kind of see what you mean, Joth.  Does it make sense coming from scum?  A little.  I can see it, but it's not obvious.

What's throwing me off though is that it seems to be something that makes absolutely no sense for him to act the way he has as town.  When he claimed and asked the question, "Should I say who I'm targeting tonight?", it really did seem to me like he had never even run through the possibility of him announcing his target, scum choosing to NK him, and throwing suspicion on a town member.  That's a bad outcome, as Xeiron (I think) pointed out, and it seemed to me like he hadn't run through the pros and cons of him claiming with various plans, which I do think the PR he was claiming to be would do.

As for the scum narrative... we've had a decent amount of day1 claims recently with no pressure, and they almost always come from town member.  He could be trying to ride the wave to get some town credibility.  I know it's not the strongest scum narrative, but I'm more concerned with the town narrative making zero sense than the scum narrative being overwhelming evidence in this case.

[sudgy]

I was thinking (which I stupidly didn't put in my first post) that, in this game, there might be a way to revive me.  I thought this was better than not claiming anything.

If this was a normal game, I probably wouldn't have claimed.  But since this is RMM, scum might not want to kill me for being a PR.

[Jimmmmm]

My meta on Jimmmmm is very limited but my thoughts on his playstyle is that he plays a safe, analytical game that provides great reads for Town in the wake of his death and leaves scum partners safe when he flips for the dark side. I want to see a more proactive Jimmmmm because his grasp of the big picture is solid and I think his contributions can be real assets. That he is not so present lends a slight scum tinge to him currently. That he remains voting Archetype as the result of some RVS is a clear indicator that he isn't actually engaging the game right now. I am going to FoS: Jimmmmm just to elicit a response from him.

I appreciate the compliments. I have been kind of making an effort to play less conservatively. Some games I get into early (like Arch's Grimm game) and some I struggle to for whatever reason and this has been one of them. I haven't been that busy, just struggling to get into the game. I'll see what this thing about sudgy is all about.

[pingpongsam]

Question for the sudgy wagon: why would he be fake claiming right now day one? What's the end game?

I will note that my vote stands against his voting pattern. His claim didn't exist until after my vote. chairs' inclination that he was acting like a SK keeps me interested in my vote because I think it fits the claim perfectly.

[ashersky]

I was thinking (which I stupidly didn't put in my first post) that, in this game, there might be a way to revive me.  I thought this was better than not claiming anything.

If this was a normal game, I probably wouldn't have claimed.  But since this is RMM, scum might not want to kill me for being a PR.

I have to think that "resurrection" as a concept is too strong or BM for this game.  That's just my own opinion.

Going back in time to save someone (i.e., doctor to stop a night kill) is significantly different mechanically from resurrecting someone from death.

The issue I see with your thinking is, if you die from your "weak" modifier, usually a doctor wouldn't protect you.  Now, a time traveling JK or RB could block you from performing your action that night, then you wouldn't have died, then you could tell us who you targeted.

[Jimmmmm]

I don't see a good reason for lynching sudgy. Could be a fakeclaim, sure, but could just as well be true. Someone with a Weak modifier is quite likely to go to the grave with a guilty result, and would ideally be able to communicate that information to everyone else. Claiming beforehand can be manipulated, sure, but it's the most obvious way of doing it. I think sudgy should claim who he is going to target, and if he dies we don't assume they are scum unless we can eliminate any other ways he could have been killed.

[ashersky]

I don't see a good reason for lynching sudgy. Could be a fakeclaim, sure, but could just as well be true. Someone with a Weak modifier is quite likely to go to the grave with a guilty result, and would ideally be able to communicate that information to everyone else. Claiming beforehand can be manipulated, sure, but it's the most obvious way of doing it. I think sudgy should claim who he is going to target, and if he dies we don't assume they are scum unless we can eliminate any other ways he could have been killed.

How would you propose we eliminate the possibility that he was:

1) scumteam NK
2) SK NK
3) a different scumteam NK
4) a vig NK
5) busdriven from town to scum

That's just 5 off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are more ways for the guy to die.

[xeiron]

Thanks pps and 2.7 for your posts. 

ashersky - are you lurking?

I'm still thinking about sudgy's question re: announcing his target.  Others' opinions?

I say using Sudgy as a cop is probably the best way he can use his role. If he hit scum and die we are way better of if we know who he targeted. The chance of catching scum probably outweights any disadvantages of having scum know who he is going to target.
He can either announce his target beforehand, or give some alternatives tied to his real- and some fake flavornames.  So that we will only know who he targeted when he flips.

Exemple:
Say before night: if my flavorname starts with

S - target Archetype
B - target nkirbit
D - target chairs

Now, scum does not know who sudgy will target, and if the day comes and sudgy is dead and flips Susan foreman , we know he targeted Archetype.
If he can timetravel, he should state which night he travels to.

I like this.  I'll do this.


Also, ash, when I read my PM, I don't try to commit it to memory.  I usually think of anti-town and mafia as pretty close to synonymous, even if it's not right.  Mafia stuck in my mind when I claimed, then when xeiron asked, I looked at my PM and saw it said anti-town.

When will yuma come here and post his quote about scumslips? 

I don't think this works, actually.  If scum just kills Sudgy, anyone he targets will be under suspicion, even though his death could have been from a NK while targeting a town member.

I agree with Ashersky here.  This doesn't feel like a town claim.  Suppose Sudgy is a weak doctor, or a weak cop, or something of that sort.  I just don't believe that over a matter of days, he sits down and comes to the conclusion that he should claim what he did.  It just doesn't make any sense.  It's so easily manipulated by scum.  If Sudgy says "I'm targeting player X", that's bad, because mafia can kill Sudgy and put player x under suspicion.  If Sudgy has some sort of hidden mechanism, well, they can just kill him and hope he landed on a town member (odds are he will, because there's more town!).  The hiding situation from Clue only came up because of a very specific set of circumstances, and only worked with hider.  This just doesn't work, and doesn't come close to working.

I'm with Ashersky that this is a fakeclaim.  The narrative I'm seeing is that Sudgy started to get some pressure, saw the credibility that Chairs and Ashersky had at least somewhat received from claiming, and tried to get a piece of the action.

Maybe Sudgy is town and just made a horrible decision to claim.  It's possible, but I hope not.  Him coming out and asking about what he should do sort of indicates to me that he really hadn't thought through all the possibilities of his role, because not claiming is just so much blatantly bette

[xeiron]

Thanks pps and 2.7 for your posts. 

ashersky - are you lurking?

I'm still thinking about sudgy's question re: announcing his target.  Others' opinions?

I say using Sudgy as a cop is probably the best way he can use his role. If he hit scum and die we are way better of if we know who he targeted. The chance of catching scum probably outweights any disadvantages of having scum know who he is going to target.
He can either announce his target beforehand, or give some alternatives tied to his real- and some fake flavornames.  So that we will only know who he targeted when he flips.

Exemple:
Say before night: if my flavorname starts with

S - target Archetype
B - target nkirbit
D - target chairs

Now, scum does not know who sudgy will target, and if the day comes and sudgy is dead and flips Susan foreman , we know he targeted Archetype.
If he can timetravel, he should state which night he travels to.

I like this.  I'll do this.


Also, ash, when I read my PM, I don't try to commit it to memory.  I usually think of anti-town and mafia as pretty close to synonymous, even if it's not right.  Mafia stuck in my mind when I claimed, then when xeiron asked, I looked at my PM and saw it said anti-town.

When will yuma come here and post his quote about scumslips? 

I don't think this works, actually.  If scum just kills Sudgy, anyone he targets will be under suspicion, even though his death could have been from a NK while targeting a town member.

I agree with Ashersky here.  This doesn't feel like a town claim.  Suppose Sudgy is a weak doctor, or a weak cop, or something of that sort.  I just don't believe that over a matter of days, he sits down and comes to the conclusion that he should claim what he did.  It just doesn't make any sense.  It's so easily manipulated by scum.  If Sudgy says "I'm targeting player X", that's bad, because mafia can kill Sudgy and put player x under suspicion.  If Sudgy has some sort of hidden mechanism, well, they can just kill him and hope he landed on a town member (odds are he will, because there's more town!).  The hiding situation from Clue only came up because of a very specific set of circumstances, and only worked with hider.  This just doesn't work, and doesn't come close to working.

I'm with Ashersky that this is a fakeclaim.  The narrative I'm seeing is that Sudgy started to get some pressure, saw the credibility that Chairs and Ashersky had at least somewhat received from claiming, and tried to get a piece of the action.

Maybe Sudgy is town and just made a horrible decision to claim.  It's possible, but I hope not.  Him coming out and asking about what he should do sort of indicates to me that he really hadn't thought through all the possibilities of his role, because not claiming is just so much blatantly better than claiming that I don't believe that anyone who actually was thinking about it as a weak PR would come to the conclusion Sudgy did.  It reminds me of Mail-Mi in Harry Potter.. he was fake-claiming scum who had obviously just not thought through the process of claiming from the view of a town member.

Vote: Sudgy

My post dissapeared. Lets try again:

I disagree with those of you saying it is bad for town !Sudgy to claim. I think the best way to use a weak role is to use it to check allignments. To use it that way you need to tell town your targets, and that is difficult without claiming.

And I think the plan I came up with can work.
Lets first assume scum will not NK Sudgy. Then Sudgy is effectively a cop, and we know more allignment tomorrow. ( or rather a allignment that is confirmed when sudgy dies).
Because of this, Sudgy will be a high priority nk target. This is good for us because there exists many town roles potential in the game, that wants to target the same person as scum. Doctor, watcher, voyeur, etc.

So if sudgy ends up dead tomorrow, and we know his target, we have information that may help us lych scum. As long as we remember that he could both have been killed by a nk, and by targeting scum, and refrain from drawing conclusions to fast, we can make use of such a situation. Like if we later get extra information from a doctor claiming to have protected Sudgy, thus eliminating the NK option.

My main point is that even though using Sudgys role this way to catch scum is not failproof, it is nowere near useless either.

[xeiron]

I don't see a good reason for lynching sudgy. Could be a fakeclaim, sure, but could just as well be true. Someone with a Weak modifier is quite likely to go to the grave with a guilty result, and would ideally be able to communicate that information to everyone else. Claiming beforehand can be manipulated, sure, but it's the most obvious way of doing it. I think sudgy should claim who he is going to target, and if he dies we don't assume they are scum unless we can eliminate any other ways he could have been killed.

How would you propose we eliminate the possibility that he was:

1) scumteam NK
2) SK NK
3) a different scumteam NK
4) a vig NK
5) busdriven from town to scum

That's just 5 off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are more ways for the guy to die.

Someone doctoring Sudgy or Sudgy flipping hider would rule out the four first. A watcher or voyeur could confirm/not confirm them. A tracker could confirm/eliminate the fifth.
And because this it a time traveling game there is far more likely that the right role targets the right person to the right time in order to give us important information.

[ashersky]

My post dissapeared. Lets try again:

I disagree with those of you saying it is bad for town !Sudgy to claim. I think the best way to use a weak role is to use it to check allignments. To use it that way you need to tell town your targets, and that is difficult without claiming.

And I think the plan I came up with can work.
Lets first assume scum will not NK Sudgy. Then Sudgy is effectively a cop, and we know more allignment tomorrow. ( or rather a allignment that is confirmed when sudgy dies).
Because of this, Sudgy will be a high priority nk target. This is good for us because there exists many town roles potential in the game, that wants to target the same person as scum. Doctor, watcher, voyeur, etc.

So if sudgy ends up dead tomorrow, and we know his target, we have information that may help us lych scum. As long as we remember that he could both have been killed by a nk, and by targeting scum, and refrain from drawing conclusions to fast, we can make use of such a situation. Like if we later get extra information from a doctor claiming to have protected Sudgy, thus eliminating the NK option.

My main point is that even though using Sudgys role this way to catch scum is not failproof, it is nowere near useless either.

I disagree wholeheartedly with the bolded sentence above.

It is, in fact, easy to do this without claiming.  Like, literally, sudgy could have said in his last post of the day "I am targeting X tonight!" and not say why.

Then no one knows he's a weak anything unless he dies, and then we know why he told us who he was targeting.

So no, claiming was not mandatory, preferred, or necessary for his "weak" modifier to be used as an investigatory tool.

[ashersky]

I don't see a good reason for lynching sudgy. Could be a fakeclaim, sure, but could just as well be true. Someone with a Weak modifier is quite likely to go to the grave with a guilty result, and would ideally be able to communicate that information to everyone else. Claiming beforehand can be manipulated, sure, but it's the most obvious way of doing it. I think sudgy should claim who he is going to target, and if he dies we don't assume they are scum unless we can eliminate any other ways he could have been killed.

How would you propose we eliminate the possibility that he was:

1) scumteam NK
2) SK NK
3) a different scumteam NK
4) a vig NK
5) busdriven from town to scum

That's just 5 off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are more ways for the guy to die.

Someone doctoring Sudgy or Sudgy flipping hider would rule out the four first. A watcher or voyeur could confirm/not confirm them. A tracker could confirm/eliminate the fifth.
And because this it a time traveling game there is far more likely that the right role targets the right person to the right time in order to give us important information.

What?

Okay, someone could doctor sudgy.  If sudgy is telling the truth, we wasted the doctor's power.  If sudgy is lying, we wasted the doctor's power.  BAD.

He didn't claim Hider, so why would you even mention this?  Bad.

A watcher would have to watch sudgy's target to see sudgy do anything.  A voyeur would confirm someone took an action, but not if that action is weak.  Both can be manipulated.  BAD.

A tracker couldn't confirm busdriving, as a bus driver switches all actions targeting one person to another person.  I think the tracker would see sudgy target the first, but not see that he got results from the second.  Bad.

I think time traveling makes it much harder to target correctly, as opposed to the opposite.  Yeah, when it's late in the game, sure, but early on?  No way.

[ashersky]

Also, just thought of this, but I'm pretty sure if we have two protective roles, we can game the game to auto-win.

Basically, once one dies, the other one time travels to save him.  Then, even if that one gets killed, the other saves him.  And they just rotate who's alive and who's dead while lynching everyone else.

[xeiron]

I don't see a good reason for lynching sudgy. Could be a fakeclaim, sure, but could just as well be true. Someone with a Weak modifier is quite likely to go to the grave with a guilty result, and would ideally be able to communicate that information to everyone else. Claiming beforehand can be manipulated, sure, but it's the most obvious way of doing it. I think sudgy should claim who he is going to target, and if he dies we don't assume they are scum unless we can eliminate any other ways he could have been killed.

How would you propose we eliminate the possibility that he was:

1) scumteam NK
2) SK NK
3) a different scumteam NK
4) a vig NK
5) busdriven from town to scum

That's just 5 off the top of my head.  I'm sure there are more ways for the guy to die.

Someone doctoring Sudgy or Sudgy flipping hider would rule out the four first. A watcher or voyeur could confirm/not confirm them. A tracker could confirm/eliminate the fifth.
And because this it a time traveling game there is far more likely that the right role targets the right person to the right time in order to give us important information.

What?

Okay, someone could doctor sudgy.  If sudgy is telling the truth, we wasted the doctor's power.  If sudgy is lying, we wasted the doctor's power.  BAD.

He didn't claim Hider, so why would you even mention this?  Bad.

A watcher would have to watch sudgy's target to see sudgy do anything.  A voyeur would confirm someone took an action, but not if that action is weak.  Both can be manipulated.  BAD.

A tracker couldn't confirm busdriving, as a bus driver switches all actions targeting one person to another person.  I think the tracker would see sudgy target the first, but not see that he got results from the second.  Bad.

I think time traveling makes it much harder to target correctly, as opposed to the opposite.  Yeah, when it's late in the game, sure, but early on?  No way.

Using a doctor power to guarantee Sudgy is not nightkilled, but killed by targeting scum  when we know who he targeted is good use of the doctor role. I rather lynch scum than save a towne any day.

Hider is usually a role with the weak modifier. I consider it possible that sudgy is a hider without him lying.

A voyeur could confirm whether a nk hit sudgy. A watcher could check who targeted sudgy. If none, he probably was not nightkilled.

I thought the tracker got to know sudgy's target after an eventual bus driving, but I might be wrong here.

[xeiron]

Also, just thought of this, but I'm pretty sure if we have two protective roles, we can game the game to auto-win.

Basically, once one dies, the other one time travels to save him.  Then, even if that one gets killed, the other saves him.  And they just rotate who's alive and who's dead while lynching everyone else.

Because of this i think time traveling protective roles are unlikely.
I think we have time traveling investigative roles instead.

[ashersky]

1)  Using a doctor power to guarantee Sudgy is not nightkilled, but killed by targeting scum  when we know who he targeted is good use of the doctor role. I rather lynch scum than save a towne any day.

2) Hider is usually a role with the weak modifier. I consider it possible that sudgy is a hider without him lying.

3) A voyeur could confirm whether a nk hit sudgy. A watcher could check who targeted sudgy. If none, he probably was not nightkilled.

4) I thought the tracker got to know sudgy's target after an eventual bus driving, but I might be wrong here.

Let me number these for you.

1)  Strongman?  Doctor fakeclaim?  How about saving, I don't know the IC?  We know the IC is town, dude.

2)  A "Weak Hider" is insane.  I don't even know how to make that work.  I've never, ever seen one used in a game.  A hider already dies if they target scum.  How is adding a modifier that kills them if they target scum going to work?  Does it add a second death?  A Hider can't be targeted by anything else, so it isn't like you are building in a way to defeat doctoring.  You are just making this up.

3)  A voyeur could confirm that sudgy was NKed, but it doesn't say anything about who sudgy targeted.  It just invalidates his results even more.  A watcher watching sudgy seeing who targeted sudgy isn't super helpful, because what if they did your doctor plan?

4)  I think busdriving affects results that are given to the targeter, and who is affected by the targeting.  The targeter doesn't know they were busdriven, though, so anyone watching the targeter only sees what the targeter did.

[EFHW]

Great discussion.  I'm inclined to believe sudgy.  This claim seems a lot like his claim in MC of being a captained doctor, which turned out to be true.  Not really thought out, asking for guidance.  I think the investigative aspect of his weak role is wasted if he doesn't claim.  It may be hard to find a way to really trust the information we get from this, but not telling us pretty much wastes it.  He could have looked for a way to breadcrumb, or cryptically announce, like ashersky says, but that's tricky too.  Now that we know, telling us might have wasted the PR itself, but it's too late now.

Now that it's done, I suggest he does not mention any names, but devises a clue based on his flavor name that would point uniquely to one person who he then targets.  sudgy make sure the clue gives nothing away ahead of time!  Those of you familiar with Dr. Who, can his flavor name be inferred from what we already know?

A couple of people have mentioned "then you guys can time travel and ....".  I don't think we should make any plans based on hopes that we could do that.  Too many things can go wrong.  Don't claim based on that, either.  ashersky I think your doctor plan wouldn't work b/c we wouldn't necessarily know what nights things were done.

PR's should use their own judgement about who to target, but I personally don't think we should use the doctor in the way xeiron suggests. 

Thoughts?

[sudgy]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

[Jimmmmm]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

But if you die and are retrospectively Doctored and it doesn't save you, that will be confirmation that you targeted scum, right?

[sudgy]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

But if you die and are retrospectively Doctored and it doesn't save you, that will be confirmation that you targeted scum, right?

No, that's confirmation that something else killed me.  If I get roleblocked, I won't die, since I never targeted them in the first place, but someone trying to doc me won't save me as I still target them.

If a roleblocker tries to save me, and I don't get saved, that means I got killed by something else.  If a doc tries to save me, and I get saved, that means I got killed by something else.

[Jimmmmm]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

But if you die and are retrospectively Doctored and it doesn't save you, that will be confirmation that you targeted scum, right?

No, that's confirmation that something else killed me.  If I get roleblocked, I won't die, since I never targeted them in the first place, but someone trying to doc me won't save me as I still target them.

If a roleblocker tries to save me, and I don't get saved, that means I got killed by something else.  If a doc tries to save me, and I get saved, that means I got killed by something else.

[sudgy]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

But if you die and are retrospectively Doctored and it doesn't save you, that will be confirmation that you targeted scum, right?

No, that's confirmation that something else killed me.  If I get roleblocked, I won't die, since I never targeted them in the first place, but someone trying to doc me won't save me as I still target them.

If a roleblocker tries to save me, and I don't get saved, that means I got killed by something else.  If a doc tries to save me, and I get saved, that means I got killed by something else.

Woooooooooah.  I thought you said does.  My bad.

That isn't a guarantee, there could be other factors (I died through some other means, maybe a strongman, someone roleblocked the doc, etc.).  I think someone roleblocking me is way more likely to to bring a solid result, because it would be harder to mess with.

[ashersky]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

But if you die and are retrospectively Doctored and it doesn't save you, that will be confirmation that you targeted scum, right?

No, that's confirmation that something else killed me.  If I get roleblocked, I won't die, since I never targeted them in the first place, but someone trying to doc me won't save me as I still target them.

If a roleblocker tries to save me, and I don't get saved, that means I got killed by something else.  If a doc tries to save me, and I get saved, that means I got killed by something else.

Woooooooooah.  I thought you said does.  My bad.

That isn't a guarantee, there could be other factors (I died through some other means, maybe a strongman, someone roleblocked the doc, etc.).  I think someone roleblocking me is way more likely to to bring a solid result, because it would be harder to mess with.

What result would that be?  If you didn't die, it would tell us absolutely NOTHING about the person you targeted.  If you are roleblocked, you get a "no result" PM from the Mod.

[Jimmmmm]

A doctor will not save me, so don't try to save me.

A roleblock of any kind will save me.

But if you die and are retrospectively Doctored and it doesn't save you, that will be confirmation that you targeted scum, right?

No, that's confirmation that something else killed me.  If I get roleblocked, I won't die, since I never targeted them in the first place, but someone trying to doc me won't save me as I still target them.

If a roleblocker tries to save me, and I don't get saved, that means I got killed by something else.  If a doc tries to save me, and I get saved, that means I got killed by something else.

Woooooooooah.  I thought you said does.  My bad.

That isn't a guarantee, there could be other factors (I died through some other means, maybe a strongman, someone roleblocked the doc, etc.).  I think someone roleblocking me is way more likely to to bring a solid result, because it would be harder to mess with.

What result would that be?  If you didn't die, it would tell us absolutely NOTHING about the person you targeted.  If you are roleblocked, you get a "no result" PM from the Mod.

I think he means retrospectively. If Roleblocking saves him then his action was the only one that caused his death.